California legislators are under scrutiny after recent decisions to halt efforts aimed at imposing stricter penalties on individuals who purchase sex from minors. The debate centers on Assembly Bill 379, penned by Democratic Assemblymember Maggy Krell, a former prosecutor with two decades of experience in sex trafficking cases. Krell's bill sought to categorize the act of paying for sex with older minors as a felony offense. However, modifications to the bill have allowed for such offenses to be charged as either misdemeanors or felonies at the discretion of prosecutors, as reported by The Post Millennial.
This latest development in California's legislative process comes after a series of contentions surrounding the legal handling of sex trafficking. In 2023, Republican State Senator Shannon Grove introduced legislation to classify trafficking minors as a serious felony, but it was obstructed by Democrats in the Assembly Public Safety Committee. A year later, Grove reached an agreement with Democrats that allowed a trafficking bill to advance, albeit with significant limitations. This compromise deemed felony charges applicable only for victims under 16 years old, and required 16 and 17-year-olds to provide evidence of trafficking to receive legal protections.
Grove described this compromise as an "ultimatum," which she reluctantly accepted. Krell's proposal was an attempt to broaden these protections to include older minors, but the committee barred the bill from reaching the Assembly floor for debate unless certain provisions were removed. "I was told that it was pulled and the only way I could get it back on the agenda is if parts of the bill would be blocked," Krell informed the press.
Assemblyman Nick Shultz, the Democratic chair of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, justified his decision to omit the felony provision, citing the need for legislative consistency. "My perspective as chair, there was a carefully crafted deal last year," Shultz stated. "We’re not saying no, but what we’re saying is if we’re going to be thoughtful policymakers, we really need to dive deep into this issue."
The reaction from advocates and some legislators has been one of frustration and anger. Grove was forthright in her dismay, declaring, "The fact that lawmakers will not make it a felony to purchase a 16- or 17-year-old for sex is completely evil." Krell, sharing Grove's concerns, vowed to persist in her efforts to reintroduce the provision in future sessions. "It’s a disgrace," she affirmed. "I’ve been doing this for 20 years, and I’m not going to quit now. And I am going to bring this part of this bill back every year until I get the books to protect children."
Despite the contention, the bill will proceed, lacking the automatic felony classification that supporters argue is crucial for deterring buyers and safeguarding vulnerable teenagers.